Squash and the Olympics -
what next, and
the legal
argument for Squash being in the Olympics NOWSteve Cubbins examines the
options ...
05-Sep-09

Rejected again ...
Now that the initial hurt of yet another rejection has
waned, perhaps it's time to look at Squash's relationship
with the Olympic movement and ask the question, what next
?

On
the face of it squash's failure this time was even more
disappointing than in 2005 - then we had few expectations
but were very close to getting in, whereas this time after
an active and expensive campaign hopes were high, so the
fact that we came nowhere near, in voting terms, is a bitter
blow.

There's no point harping on about the unsuitability of
Golf and Rugby Sevens though, the IOC made it clear that
"added value" was the main criteria, and that's sure
to be the case next time an opportunity comes around -
whenever that may be.

It's all very well for Jacques Rogge to urge the
discarded sports to "think quietly and analyze why there
were not selected and have another go," (GamesBids
story) but if the IOC's main concern is the amount
of money a sport will bring to the games, squash would be
better off forgetting about the Olympics forever.

World Juniors denied a chance of a medal in their
prime years

The signs were there, WSF bid co-ordinator George Mieras's
post-Berlin report makes for depressing reading,
reporting that after that well-received presentation in
Lausanne the word was "you do know that the decision is
made, it will be rugby and golf", and that before the
Berlin vote an IOC board member revealed that "we hope to
reach consensus on the sports before voting".

Was it really as depressing as "5 sports provided a
veneer of respectability for a process in which 2
sports, pre-ordained to emerge, duly did so" makes it sound?
Probably, yes.

So what next ???

The options appear to be:

Forget the
Olympics

Gear up now for 2020
in case a place becomes available

Make a point in
London 2012

Get
squash into London 2012

The first two are
self-explanatory, but let's look at the last two ...

Make a point in 2012 ...

There
have been suggestions from several sources that squash
should muscle in on London 2012, either by staging a major
tournament during the Olympics to try to catch some of the
media frenzy, or possibly as a 'demonstration sport'.

Demonstration sports aren't supposed to exist any more, and
England Squash chairman Zena Wooldridge believes such
a move would be impossible (Telegraph
article).

Anyway, since we're definitely out for 2016, and probably
longer, what's the point of that?

The legal route to 2012 and beyond ...

Then there's the legal argument.

Some believe that
the IOC broke its own rules in that controversial final vote
in Singapore in 2005, when Squash and Karate, having been
voted onto the 2012 programme, failed to get a two-thirds
majority in a subsequent vote to become 'Olympic Sports'.

The argument is a long one (full
report from Gordon Kerr) but the basic assertion is that
Squash and Karate had already been granted 'Olympic Sport'
status in the first vote, that the second vote was
unconstitutional, unnecessary, and therefore invalid.

The upshot of pursuing this line, in a possibly costly court
case, is that Squash and Karate would become part of the
2012, and subsequent, Olympic programmes. Job done.

The various squash authorities have known of this for a long
time, but kept it under wraps while the 2016 bid progressed.
Now it appears to be the only way of possibly making the
Olympics, so upsetting the IOC by taking them to court may
not be such an unthinkable proposition.

Additionally, a 'seriously eminent' London QC reportedly
says that the case has 'stone legs' and is ready to take up
the challenge if required.

"The weighting of the IOC’s
criteria happened to favour rugby and golf. If the same were
applied to the 26 sports currently in the Olympics then a
majority of them would fail to lift the bar. We just happen
to be on the outside.”